I am getting dazed if hit from behind too. Doesn't this mean we are getting crit? This could account for the increased damage you took. Even if they fixed the glyph it should not increase white damage taken.

Awyndel wrote:I am getting dazed if hit from behind too. Doesn't this mean we are getting crit? This could account for the increased damage you took. Even if they fixed the glyph it should not increase white damage taken.

wasnt getting crit , and you would take more dmg with the glyph because u wouldnt have phys dmg reduction

Why do we use consecrate really? I hardly use it single target and I'm having a lot of problems getting a stable aoe rotation for lvl 80, wouldn't it be better to have that button to press 6 seconds earlier for the current aoe rotation?

Arincia wrote:Got to test out glyph of salv in raid today. Was OTing sindy at 98% threat didn't want to overtake MT so poped salv on myself (didn't have time to swap it out) and i had no threat (IG threat % went away) till till Salv wore off back and was at 88/90ish% threat. (would have to double cheack using omen to confirm but im fairly certain it works this way). It could be a nice way to do a pull by poping it on a high threat dps just before so you can get a good solid threat lead.

This is looking like my third major glyph now that divine protection is fixed. Sounds good for Festergut, for example, as well as for crazy dpsers.

I think our majors are very weak (e.g. compared to prot warriors where there some very nice ones - e.g. +1 target for cleave). I am taking consecration and ascetic crusader as my other two, although I am not convinced by the latter (given that I generally spam hotr and anyway mana is fine now).

I would not recommend focus shield to people running five mans. I glyphed it pre-patch and loved it, but now we lack SoC, I think it is a bad choice. AS is doing 26% of my dps in heroics atm.

Why do we use consecrate really? I hardly use it single target and I'm having a lot of problems getting a stable aoe rotation for lvl 80, wouldn't it be better to have that button to press 6 seconds earlier for the current aoe rotation?

To increase the dmg and duration WHEN you have to use it.You hardly use it tho, but when you do you can get a little extra out of it, theres not like theres many other glyphs to choose from anyway :S

Why do we use consecrate really? I hardly use it single target and I'm having a lot of problems getting a stable aoe rotation for lvl 80, wouldn't it be better to have that button to press 6 seconds earlier for the current aoe rotation?

To increase the dmg and duration WHEN you have to use it.You hardly use it tho, but when you do you can get a little extra out of it, theres not like theres many other glyphs to choose from anyway :S

I also find it easier to work in with the Consecration glyph, it makes the cooldown 36 seconds which is a neat multiple of 9. That way you can consistently replace the same ability with it: I went with Judgement since it's pretty weak in an AoE situation and Sanctuary provides a nice amount of mana in those.

Hey, first of all i wanted to thank Theckhd for the effor and time to test prot paladins and share his results with us.Yet i would like to put out a question regarding the talent build proposed for paladins. Atm I dual speced prot to test both the WoG and threat builds. Im prefering to try out WoG, im finding threat managable.However, im very tempted to drop the 2 points in wrath of the lightbringer.At the moment, testing on a dummy and with that talent, crusader strike is dealing less damage then Hammer of the Righteous For single target damage (of course, i have t10 2 piece bonus and glyphs for increaased hammer damage).Given this, im using hammer of the righteous in my single target rotation rather then crusader strike. Since im not using crusader strike at all, All i get from WotlB is 60% judgement damage and a increased crit chance for wrath... Im feeling its worth it to swap these points to consecration (mainly for mana efficiency) and try to put out another on Crusade (ret tree), at least untill crusader strike gets some kind of buff.I just wanted to see if i am missing something on this reasoning.Thanks in advance.

aresius wrote:Yet i would like to put out a question regarding the talent build proposed for paladins. Atm I dual speced prot to test both the WoG and threat builds. Im prefering to try out WoG, im finding threat managable.However, im very tempted to drop the 2 points in wrath of the lightbringer.At the moment, testing on a dummy and with that talent, crusader strike is dealing less damage then Hammer of the Righteous For single target damage (of course, i have t10 2 piece bonus and glyphs for increaased hammer damage).Given this, im using hammer of the righteous in my single target rotation rather then crusader strike. Since im not using crusader strike at all, All i get from WotlB is 60% judgement damage and a increased crit chance for wrath...

aresius wrote:Im feeling its worth it to swap these points to consecration (mainly for mana efficiency) and try to put out another on Crusade (ret tree), at least untill crusader strike gets some kind of buff.

If your looking for more dmg, consecration is among the worst choises to spend talents on, but crusade is a good choise

The numbers i got the day of the 4.0 patch was that my crusader strike was ahead of my Hammer.Dunno what could make that differ really.But doesnt crusader strike scale with weapon and AP, while hamer scales with AP? (atleast the aoe portion)Thus with a "slow" weapon Crusader strike would end up with more dmg than hammer.But with a fast "tank" weapon crusader would end up a lot less?

Treck wrote:The numbers i got the day of the 4.0 patch was that my crusader strike was ahead of my Hammer.Dunno what could make that differ really.But doesnt crusader strike scale with weapon and AP, while hamer scales with AP? (atleast the aoe portion)Thus with a "slow" weapon Crusader strike would end up with more dmg than hammer.But with a fast "tank" weapon crusader would end up a lot less?

With Vengeance stacked, HotR was outpacing CS. But as mentioned above, with the 150% base (increased from 120%), that answers the question and the cheese. At least they went that route of buffing CS and not the route of nerfing HotR

Garath.Gorefiend wrote:What people are missing, if they are using recount or some other meter is that HotR counts as 2 hits every time you use it...as a result, meters will show it as half the damage per hit.

I don't think most of us were making that oversight.

With the buff to CS, here's what I get from the ability damage simulation:

That's including the T10 2-piece. If you remove that from the Nova portion (since it's currently bugged), you're left with 4357/1.2=3631 damage from the nova. That plus the physical portion is still less than CS.

If they fix the T10 2-piece or Glyph bugs, then HotR will overtake CS again, it looks like.

Also note that dummy measurements are mostly irrelevant. Both spells scale with AP, and due to raid buffs and Vengeance, that scaling is usually what determines the winner in a raid situation. Right now, CS should scale slightly better:

CS is 1.5*2.4/14*1.9*0.6684=0.3266 or 32% of AP (independent of weapon speed)HotR is about 4-6% for the physical portion (depending on weapon speed) and anywhere from 24% to 32% depending on whether you apply the glyph and tier bonus factors.

If they ever fix the T10 2-piece or glyph bugs, then HotR will likely overtake CS again.

looks like hotr still might be ahead,,, that was just like 10 minutes of alternating cs/hotr casts and autoattacks only, they are about =, with hotr a tad more

....

What part of "dummy measurements are mostly irrelevant" was unclear? If I put unbuffed AP values (3500 or so) into the sim, I get the result you and Garath observed - HotR slightly ahead. But unless you plan on clicking off all of your raid buffs before you pull, that's meaningless for raid boss tanking.

At best, it might mean that HotR is better for heroic 5-mans, since you're unlikely to have much Vengeance AP in those.

Apologizes if this has been asked before, but can you explain why the small change made between your Threat build 2/31/3 (http://wowtal.com/#k=RsnAz0R.a5o.paladin) and the build used for your calculations on the "Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x" thread of 0/31/5 (http://wowtal.com/#k=-kfFdYWM.a5o.paladin.). It seems the only difference is swapping Judgments of the Pure for Improved Judgement. Is it just a matter of preference of threat vs. utility? Assuming I'm correct in understanding that once we level past 80 Judgments of the Pure will become obsolete in favor of Rule of Law in terms of threat, wouldn't the 0/31/5 spec be more ideal?

Zabkorili wrote:Apologizes if this has been asked before, but can you explain why the small change made between your Threat build 2/31/3 (http://wowtal.com/#k=RsnAz0R.a5o.paladin) and the build used for your calculations on the "Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x" thread of 0/31/5 (http://wowtal.com/#k=-kfFdYWM.a5o.paladin.). It seems the only difference is swapping Judgments of the Pure for Improved Judgement. Is it just a matter of preference of threat vs. utility? Assuming I'm correct in understanding that once we level past 80 Judgments of the Pure will become obsolete in favor of Rule of Law in terms of threat, wouldn't the 0/31/5 spec be more ideal?

It's purely a utility vs. DPS question. I personally prefer the utility of Imp. J, but if you were going for an all-out threat build you would see a slight gain by moving those points into JotP.

The builds I listed are all designed for level 80. Once we have access to Rule of Law, it would be preferable to JotP, and I'll update the builds accordingly.